Which version is best?

The Granada series staring Jeremy Brett is the most accurate. The Roxburgh version is good too

Of the five versions I've seen, the Jeremy Brett version is far the best. It follows Sir Arthur's novel faithfully (just a few abridgements and some modification of Dr. Mortimer's character). It still is not one of the better episodes in Granada's series, though Brett was the best Holmes ever, and Edward Hardwicke (and David Burke before him) among the best Watsons.
Of the other versions:
Basil Rathbone's in more highly rated in IMDB, but I could never stand Nigel Bruce's portrayal as a bumbling Dr. Watson. Rathbone as Holmes is good, maybe even provided a model for Jeremy Brett to follow.
The Peter Cushing version is a typical Hammer Studios film. It has its merits, Andre Morell providing the model of a dignified, competent Dr. Watson that was followed by Burke and Hardwicke, but Cushing's portrayal of Holmes is too mannered and precious. This version also deviates from the original novel quite a bit.
The Peter Cooke/ Dudley Moore version is a sort of comedy send up of the Rathbone version. It's not great, but is worth seeing for some parts.
The recent version with Richard Roxburgh and Ian Harte is almost painful. It has decent production values, but changes the story wildly. Harte makes an interesting Watson, but seems to be more akin to Holmes than does Roxburgh.
According to psychoanalysts who have studies Doyle's stories, Holmes (had he been a real person) would have suffered from bipolar disorder. Jeremy Brett acutally did. Holmes is also portrayed as being a chain smoker. Jeremy Brett actually was. There have been few instances where the match of the actor and character have been so apt, and I do not expect we will ever see anyone portray Holmes as "realistically" as Brett did.
I can still imagine the best version of The Hound of the Baskervilles waiting to be made.

I haven't seen all the versions (indeed, with so many versions over the years can anyone be sure they have?), including the Brett one, but I have seen some of the other Brett episodes.

Personally, I've always thought Cushing made the ideal Holmes as far as being loyal to Conan Doyle's vision...unpredictable (to anyone but himself, of course), impulsive and positively manic, almost to the edge of his sanity, at least when the "game's afoot." That's the picture I always got of Holmes while reading the books. (I'm a little puzzled by someone's description on here of him as being "mannered." He certainly doesn't seem that in any sense of the word I've ever used!) I'm not knocking Brett, I think he made an excellent Holmes, but certainly a bit more low-key. As for Rathbone, over the years he made the role so much his own that, rather than playing Holmes, he was playing the "Basil Rathbone Holmes." (Again, it's been so long since I've seen his version of "Hound" that I can't directly comment upon it, so this is a generalization. However, I tend to agree with the poster who said that Bruce as Watson was less of a bumbler in the Fox movies, and that his endearing incompetence didn't really show up until the Universals.)

However, even without having seen the Brett version I can feel fairly certain that it would be among those closest to the book; as I recall, that was one of the goals of that series all along.

As for the liberties taken with the Hammer version, though, I don't think they hurt anything (and are certainly milder than, say, those taken with "Curse of Frankenstein" or "Dracula"). Not only do they allow Hammer to place this squarely among their horror films, but this is, after all, a mystery: where's the fun in seeing the same old puzzles and solutions told over and over again when you know exactly what's going to happen?

And just as importantly, I've always felt they did the horror angle up very nicely. Gorgeous day shots, very creepy and atmospheric night ones, mise-en-scenes with mysteries and shocks often just off the edge of the frame and a wonderful mix of horrible sounds and silences...if seen in the proper state of mind I think this is probably the scariest movie Hammer ever made!

The Hammer version (1959) was the most exciting and my favorite. The Jeremy Brett version was probably more accurate. Nobody can play Holmes better than Basil Rathbone.

What are you gonna do? Kill me? Every body Dies. John Garfield (Body and Soul)

As a lifelong Sherlockian, I feel compelled to say that there is no completely satisfactory film version of this often filmed story. There are several versions that have "features of interest." The one that you will like the most is liable to be the first one that you see, especially if you are at an impressionable age.

Having seen the Hammer production in it's original release, I can tell you that I had reservations about it then. Peter Cushing's mercurial, "not to suffer fools lightly" interpretation of Holmes was the most accurate up to that time.

My favorite performances of Holmes have been (in no particular order), Peter Cushing, Basil Rathbone, John Wood (in the theater), and Jeremy Brett.

"Ignore the man behind the curtain!"

[deleted]

It looks like I may be the only one here who's seen the version with Stewart Granger as Holmes and - get this - William Shatner as Sir Henry and Sir Hugo.
As much as I love Stewart Granger, this does not rank very high amongst his performances, or as an adaptation of The Hound of the Baskervilles.
For one thing, Granger was simply too cool to be Holmes, if you know what I mean.
The fact that it was an American television production doesn't help, either.

HOTB, 1959, starring Chris Lee, IMHO.